Emission Trends and SIP Scenarios for SO2 and NOx Patrick Cummins WRAP Meeting December 14, 2005

Stationary source issues are a key component of the regional haze plans –NOx and SO2 are the pollutants of concern –Specific requirements related to BART sources –85% to 9O% of the NOx and SO2 emissions from BART eligible units are from power plants

Where We’ve Been  Western states take leadership role on regional haze –Grand Canyon Commission –WRAP formed as successor organization –309 option included in final 1999 rule –Annex submitted Sept 30, 2000 –5 309 SIPs submitted December 2003 –Conducting state-of-the-art technical analysis

Laws, Regulations and Lawsuits  July 1999: Regional Haze Rule  July 2001: BART guidelines proposed  May 2002: Decision in Corn Growers vacates BART  Jun 2003: Haze rule revised to incorporate Annex  July 2003: EPA revises mobile source section of 309  Apr 2004: BART rule and guidelines reproposed  Feb 2005: Decision in CEED vacates WRAP Annex  July 2005: BART rule finalized  Aug 2005: BART alternatives & 309 reproposed  Sep 2005: Parties file notice to sue on BART  Sep 2005: Comments on alternatives proposal  Jan 2006?: Final Trading & 309 rule  2006 and beyond: More lawsuits and rule revisions???  : No revisions to the Clean Air Act  : EPA elects not to extend CAIR to the West

But What About Emissions?  (11 state region & tribal sources): –35% reduction in SO2 from EGU’s –202,500 tons per year (573 to 370)  How’d that happen? –Centralia –4 Corners and San Juan –Craig, Hayden and Metro Denver Plants –Navajo –Apache –Coronado

More Reductions on The Way!!  Springerville  Commanche  San Juan  Four Corners  Mohave  Cholla  PacifiCorp Plants –Huntington 2, Dave Johnston 3 & 4, Jim Bridger What’s Left? –Pawnee –Boardman –5 to 1O units that are small and/or partially controlled  Additional 125,OOO to 15O,OOO tons of reduction from these plants

Net Result  2O18 SO2 emissions from existing plants: –222,OOO to 247,OOO tons per year –O.17 to O.19 #/mmbtu average emission rate –Compares to presumptive BART limit of O.15 –Down from 573,OOO tpy in 1998 –Approximately 6O% reduction from 1998  325,OOO to 35O,OOO tons per year reduced –Includes increased capacity at existing plants –Forecast for SO2 from new plants is 39,OOO tons per year in 2O18: approx. 12,OOO MW

Where does that leave us?  GCVTC recommended 5O to 7O% reduction in SO2 from 199O levels by 2O4O –9 state transport region & tribal sources  199O SO2 emissions were 829,OOO tons  2OOO SO2 emissions were 622,OOO tons  Current emissions are : –Non utilities in 2OO2: 158,OOO –Utilities in 2OO4: 343,OOO –Total: 5O1,OOO  4O% reduction achieved in 14 years

9 State 2O18 Forecast  Utilities –231,OOO to 253,OOO tons per year –Includes 34,5OO tons per year from new sources  Non Utilities –19O,3OO tons per year –Includes net 37,OOO ton increase: growth less retirements  2O18 total: 422,OOO to 444,OOO tons per year  45% to 5O% reduction from 199O levels –Well below 2O18 Annex milestone for 9 states of 48O,OOO tpy

Comparison to 5 State Program  5 State 309 Milestone for 2O18 =309,000 tons –For comparison: –Adjust milestone by 1O,OOO tons for CEMs –Move 16,OOO tons for suspended smelter to smelter set aside –Equals 283,OOO tons –2018 Base Case  Existing Utilities: 191,5OO  Non Utilities: 127,3OO  New Utility Sources: 21,3OO  Total: 34O,1OO  Additional reductions needed to meet milestone: 57,1OO  Additional reductions expected: 57,OOO to 73,OOO

What about NOx?  EGU emissions = about 15% of inventory  NOx generally contributes < 10% of haze  No significant trend in NOx emissions from power plants  Some areas have larger NOx contributions –Significant NOx reductions coming from mobile sources  NOx emissions are of concern for other reasons (ozone, acid deposition, etc.)

What about NOx?  46 BART-eligible units >200 MW in 13 states that exceed presumptive limits  Achieving presumptive limits at BART-eligible units = 30% reduction  Plants > 750 MW = 16% reduction  Presumptive limits on all units (including non-BART) = 40% reduction  Combustion controls on all units = 34% reduction  Several utilities have identified problems meeting presumptive limits with combustion controls

Questions and Issues  Revisions to 309 SIPs –How to do better than BART demonstration –309 states need to determine next steps. Work with stakeholders.  BART for 308 and NOx? –Unlikely that SO2 program will be expanded –Trading alternative may have value for NOx. Possible expansion to all non-CAIR states. –Utility only program for NOx?  What non-utility sources are of concern (BART and non-BART)? –How many, what kind, where?

In conclusion…….  Most of the progress through 2018 will be in the base case (incl., federal mobile source controls)  Biggest effect in control case will be from SO2 reductions that are already in the pipe –How do we package our success to meet the requirements (especially when BART remains a moving target)  Work with EPA to address outstanding issues with alternative programs and 309. –Reaffirm state leadership role, working with stakeholders, to establish solutions that work for the West  NOx is a question that effects more sources –Presumptive limits on 750 MW plants is ½ the battle –Several options exist. What do sources and states want? –Can do some sensitivity runs